Points

Content count

Points

Content count

Popular Content

I was thinking in a longer perspective on profitability on panel production. Much of their GM (not to mention their NM considering high R&D) on that was related to the cost of polysilicon. It's like you want to move the long-term ASP pain of FSLR from falling polysilicon costs to DQ. DQ shareholder pain won't alleviate FSLR shareholder pain so what's the point on bashing another stock for the pain that hits both your stock and that stock. Again I'm talking long-term profits and then it is really the thin film margin only that suffer from lowered polysilicon production costs not the polysilicon production margins. At least DQ can (in theory) do something about it by remaining competitive by re-taking the cost leadership in the future. FSLR can't do anything about the drop in contribution from this margin component (they can improve other components, but not this one).

Regarding the ASP drops for upstream supplies, if you track the 2 past major oversupplies there is only a slight bounce back in ASP of 15% or so. Then a period of relative stability. The most recent was the crash to the lower $0.50's down to the low low $0.30s appx 1.5 to 2 years ago. This happened relatively quick before CN demand drove up the price to the upper $0.30's where it stood for the last year. The $0.31-$0.32 was more or less cash cost less depreciation. Remember Poly back then was also bottomed at $12/KG back then as well.
You should expect this cycle to act similar but the recovery to be slightly different due to the CN policy change designed to drive the ASP to $0.25.
As for the past YOY cost cutting, you need to recognize that the company was shifting from a pure Poly module manufacturer to a mono manufacturer. Those cost reductions include what is now 30% production and climbing of mono that was a 8-10% higher production cost with what was claimed as a 12%+/- higher ASP.
The reductions were also during a materials price hike on most materials. Eventually there is a re-balancing of those input cost margins. The Si Cost of it when Diamond wire and new Tech is in place is going to drop the SI from $0.075 to $0.4. That alone is a permanent 10% savings. The SI cost will have room to drop even further in the next 2 years that will impact the cost to manufacture a module by another 5-10%.
What is clear is that the CN mfg cost are approaching $0.25 or less. This will be a permanent price range that the upstream suppliers will lower costs to be profitable. The CN companies have a path to further increase efficiencies by another 20% using new technologies that wiill be ramped in the next 1 to 2 years. These will drive the productin costs down to the $0.20 range to support the $0.24 ASP price range targets in 2020. Just in time for FSLR Series 6 mass scale ramps.
By the way some of the new technology that will be ramped chips away at some of FLSR benefits being better performance under higher temperatures and low light absorption.That 7% benefit making them more desirable for certain markets and a price premium per watt will decrease the premium.

I consider this poly drop from $19 to $11 way less of a challenge for FSLR than the historical drop from $500 to $19 which they navigated through quite successfully. The key was delivering a higher rate of process cost reduction / efficiency improvement than their CN peers.
Currently JKS' cost data suggests that the rate of process cost reduction (i.e. non-poly cost) of the CNs has slowed down significantly over the last several quarters to less than 5% yoy, which translates to an advantage for FSLR who is currently going supersonic in cost reduction with S6. Yes, the CNs are currently seeing way lower input costs through cheaper upstream materials but this does not truly reflect process improvement. It's pure desperation of wafer and cell makers who are forced to sell at cash or below to remain liquid.
Anyhows, interesting topic that belongs in a FSLR thread and not here.
As DQ is concerned I'm just interested in counteracting some irrational pumping that we've seen here (stock going to $120 etc.) and warning people based on facts and data. A poly drop from $19 to $11 means that DQ quarterly EPS drops from $3 to $0, as simple as that. Moreover since poly oversupply will likely worsen over the next quarters there's little chance that earnings will rebound anytime soon. Imho this is not reflected in the current share price yet and people have to be extremely careful. The last thing I would do is hold this one through the ER next week. I'm sure some of the smart people here think alike so please speak up and don't make me look like the forum b*tch here please.

The con call did not sound bad. The Guidance was lowered for the full year but Q3 looks strong. Margins are being suggested as strong. Q4 Guidance looks to be similar to Q1 18 volumes. The revenue outlook for Q4 looks to be about $1.2-$1.3Billion.

HQCL reported today and the transcript is out. They are suggesting the decline in input costs is going to more than offset the decline in module price that will help in the gross margins. That is similar to what JKS has indicated for the second half.
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4198574-hanwha-q-cells-co-ltd-hqcl-ceo-seong-woo-nam-q2-2018-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single
and for Q3 and Q4 following the subsidy cuts in China, we expect ASPs to go down. But we believe that that's going to be accompanied by a corresponding decline and input prices such as wafer and other raw materials for cells and modules.
So the margin outlook actually is expected to improve for the second half of 2018, especially given that we have a lot of shipments to take place in value added markets such as European state.

Their wafer conversion cost must be running at 5-6 cts/w, which means they currently produce wafers for 10-11 cts/w. Halting their wafer operations entirely and switching to external wafers, which currently only cost 7 cts/w, may provide them with humongous cost savings for a little while (as long as wafers trade so cheaply). They may have pulled this trick to spice up Q3 margins, who knows.

It's your dirty mind.
They just MADE $1/share in earnings, when you confidently predicted your calculations showed they would be losing money.
Your calculations were correct, by the way--just for the wrong stock. It's your beloved FSLR that couldn't stay above breakeven during this period.
Of the two stocks, I know which one I'm more comfortable holding. It's just a shame the market doesn't reward results equally, otherwise we both know which stock would lead the other by $20 share price.
I suspect that gap will now narrow, if not close.

The GCL-Shanghai Electric deal is off you guys. Maybe that's what has DQ fired up.
That doesn't mean GCL will not start their Xinjiang plant. To the contrary, trial runs are supposed to start at the end of the month. That's 40kt of low cost poly capacity right there you guys.
http://guangfu.bjx.com.cn/news/20180807/918883.shtml
"...Among them, the Xinjiang project is expected to be put into trial production before the end of this month; and based on the talents and technological advantages of the company for many years, combined with the low electricity prices in Xinjiang and the purchase of new domestic equipment, the overall cost level of the Xinjiang project is expected to be 10% lower than the competitors..."

I think there's an awful lot of fun to come around 2020 when scientists & engineers have mastered the S6 transition and are again balls deep into cost reduction and efficiency improvement. At the same time you'll have 7.4GW of capacity online which will drop their OPEX/W to a competitive 4 cts/W. I told myself I will revalue the investment when they are around 10GW. If I see them spiking way beyond what's justified through fundamentals I may push the sell button earlier. However not touching before 2020.

I have no problem with a discussion of any particular stock's merits. That's why we're all here. But I DON'T need a recommendation on what to do with my holdings, especially from someone holding an equally questionable stock. I can ignore it once. Twice. Three times, even. But after a while, it starts to (obviously) get under my skin. Enough is enough. This is not a Yahoo pumper/basher board. Let's stick to a discussion of the facts, and let everyone make their own investment decisions from there.

I double downed on CSIQ 2 days ago. I also took an entry position for JKS then as well for an earnings run up.
I believe the potential for cost reduction is great when compared to the ASP drop. Buy a Poly PERC cell and slap it into a module for <$0.24 and sell for $0.30 is a gross of $0.06/watt. That is an increase in margins.
Mono PERC cells bought and slapped into modules for <$0.25 and sold for $0.32 is a $0.07 gross and margins of almost 22%.
Both of these potentials are an increase in both margins and gross for companies that have a good sales chanell. The Downside is risk to volumes for JKS. I believe CSIQ has already set their volume guidance reasonably.

Poly dropping is very much an issue for FSLR and other thin film guys... Since cost of silicon technology is going down and competitiveness is growing. As for S6 modules, look at competition - Canadian Solar HIKU modules. HiKu is the first poly module (attention Poly, not Mono) exceeding 400 W and thus reaches one of the highest poly module power outputs in the solar industry. Also, If HIKU to convert to bifacial type then we may have module of 680 W capacity, as back side generates 70% of the front, according to Qu (CEO) himself. Same amount of aluminum for frame, savings in land use, etc, etc... Plus, new Indian 25% tariff blocks modules form China and Malaysia, exactly where FSLR and SPWR have facilities. And Vietnam and Thailand are exempt (as developing nations), exactly where CSIQ have production. https://www.canadiansolar.com/en/solar-panels/hiku.html

If that includes a short depreciation period it is impressive. Si production costs are coming down to 2.5 cents per watt. This means that FSLR's historically massive gross margin component is evaporating.

Trina Solar thinks differently... And they are inside the industry, unlike above mentioned ANALysts, who thinks "hypothetically", sitting on the 66-th floor in Manhattan....
https://www.pv-tech.org/news/pv-talk-rongfang-yin-vice-president-of-global-sales-and-marketing-at-trina

They have set a blended price target in the $0.26-$0.28 price range based on a 15-17% further price erosion from the $0.32-$0.33 ASP target the had forecast originally. That is the year end pricing. It looks based on a 30/70 blending of MonoPerc/PolyPerc that price range is close to where the ASP ranges are today.
In 2019, I might gather another 5-10% price decline as they shift more to 50/50 or 60/40 MonoPerc/PolyPerc.
A 5% further decline would place average PolyPerc at $0.24 and average MonoPerc at $0.28 for a blended ASP of $0.26. Currently Mono Perc in China is $0.286 average with a low of $0.27 while the ROW is $0.04 higher. Poly would have a slight ASP decline from todays lows.
A 10% decline in 2019 would then drive the blended ASP to $0.2475 by the end of the year. That would place pricing at .265/.235 MonoPerc/PolyPerc.
If you look at the original target year end ASP of $0.32 with an 18% GM, their cost to manufacture was going to be $0.2816. That cost is above either a 5% or a 10% price decline ASP for year end 2019. To mantain 18% GM on the $0.27 year end 2018, the blended cost at $0.23. With a $0.10 module processing cost and current Perc Cell prices, that $0.23 comes in around $0.235. This is a $0.035 gross per watt. Currently no company shipping globally has an average Opex+Interest below $0.04/watt.
Basically this confirms that they will likely have an ASP above cash cost + depreciation.

Nice read from Trina on the markets.
https://www.pv-tech.org/news/pv-talk-rongfang-yin-vice-president-of-global-sales-and-marketing-at-trina
BNEF has recently said after the China policy changes that it expected PV module prices to fall 34%. What kind of solar module price declines are you expecting?
"One thing I would like to clarify is that with or without the China policy changes, our forecast for this year’s prices was a decline. For example at the start of the [module] prices would be around US$0.36/W and were expected to decline to say US$0.33/W or US$0.32/W. This was expected due to cost reductions, technology etc…
But people have tried to say that due to the China policy changes the prices would decline by so much. What will be interesting to watch is what will be the actual impact on prices, due only to the China policy change. From my perspective, I think the China policy change will make a 15% to 18% difference to pricing by year-end.

https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2018/08/08/business/08reuters-usa-trade-china-energy.html
BEIJING — Shenzhen Energy Group Co Ltd said on Wednesday it has ditched a plan to buy three U.S. solar power stations after failing to get approval from a U.S. government panel amid growing trade tensions between the world's top two economies.
The decision comes after the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), a government panel that reviews foreign investments for potential national security risks, has not ruled on its deal which was announced last October, it said.

Bye Bye HQCL... joining the parade.
SEOUL, South Korea, Aug. 2, 2018 /PRNewswire/ -- Hanwha Q CELLS Co., Ltd. ("Hanwha Q CELLS" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: HQCL), a global leading photovoltaic manufacturer of high-performance, high-quality solar modules, today announced that its board of directors (the "Board") has received a preliminary non-binding proposal letter (the "Proposal Letter"), dated August 2, 2018, from Hanwha Solar Holdings Co., Ltd. ("HSH"), a subsidiary of Hanwha Chemical Corporation incorporated in the Republic of Korea, to acquire all of the outstanding shares of the Company not already owned by HSH in a "going private" transaction (the "Proposed Transaction") for a cash consideration of US$9.00 per American Depositary Share ("ADS", each ADS representing fifty ordinary shares) or US$0.18 per ordinary share. A copy of the Proposal Letter is attached hereto as Exhibit A.